howardfuhrman

I'm considering "going mirrorless". In

particular I feel a call to Sony's Alpha7II, mainly

because I have a lot of full-frame Nikon glass that maybe I could use on it. Apart from loss of AF, any reason why not? I would probably convert to compatible glassware over time, as funds allow.

 

My previous experience with mirrorless is through

a variety of bridge cameras. No problem with using

an EVF or rear screen. In fact some of my better

composed pictures have been taken with bridges.

However those cameras generally lacked response, and battery life could be better.

 

So how do users find the latest generation of

"serious" mirrorless cameras. Do you think they're a mature technology yet? Or do we have some way

to go?

 

Maybe you feel there's room for improvement and I should wait for the A7III or some such to be announced?

 

Also, what's support for non-dedicated and off-camera flash like? (I hate that stupid Minolta/Sony non-standard hotshoe BTW)

Take a look at the photos posted at http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1255248?b=2 . Many of the photos are impressive. If you have good full frame Nikon glass, losing AF is a big sacrifice. Maybe if you make the switch, go all the way, buy a A7rii and get that high resolution sensor and sell your Nikon glass and get Zeiss glass. While the Zeiss glass is expensive, look at the photos in the website I referenced and make your own decision.

Good luck with whatever you decide..

<p>Looking at purchasing a 35mm for my kit I am contemplating getting Loxia 35mm2 for my A7ll (street and event photography) however I can get a used RX 1 at the same price point. As I'm considering the pros and cons I would like to hear everyones thoughts on this subject. I love the IQ of the 35mm 1.4ZA but size is a deterrent for me. Thanks in advance!</p>

I have the RX1. While it is frustrating slow, it produces great, high IQ photos. It is hard to imagine that the A7ii could be any slower, but on the other hand it is hard imagine that IQ from the A7ii would be any better than the RXii. Another consideration is the RX1 does not have a built in EVF. there is a supplemental EVF. I always prefer a built in EVF. Despite these weaknesses with the RX1, I am keeping it.

<p>I am very happy that the Photo.net returned to the 1.0. The new version seems a long way from prime time. It was slow and cumbersome and I gave up using it after a few minutes. It also got horrible reviews on a thread in dpreview.</p>

<p>Harry the Whippet - Relaxing on Super Sunday</p>

<p><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/18184920-md.jpg" alt="" width="680" height="680" /><br /> Panasonic GX8 Olympus 45 1.8 Blended layers</p>

<p>Ed,<br>

I do not believe a Sony 70-200/4 is a fair weight comparison to a Nikon 70-200 2.8 VRII. Generally the faster the lens the heavier it is. If Nikon markets a 70-200/4 of comparable quality to the Sony, that would be a fairer weight comparison.</p>

<p>Richard,<br>

Your choice of camera and Lenses (or lens) can best determined by the subject matter. There are many smaller and simpler camera available depending upon your subjects and your budgets. <br>

You indicated that your desire is to simplify and get equipment that is smaller and lighter. The range of cameras are broad. Some questions come to mind that you need to answer or provide to this forum for those making recommendations.<br>

What subjects do you shoot?<br>

Do you shoot in low light or day light?<br>

Are your subjects sports, fast action?<br>

Do you require wide angle, normal, short telephoto, long telephoto?<br>

Will a good zoom lens work with you?<br>

Do you require a very responsive camera?<br>

What is your IQ tolerance? i.e. Do you require the the top IQ possible or is good enough OK?<br>

What is your budget?</p>

<p>I shoot with Panasonic G3, have a variety of good lenses and get satisfying results. Many of the prior contributors to this thread have expressed their opinions why m4/3 is and bad. I suggest that you take a look at photos taken with an OMD in the following thread and determine based whether the camera and lenses available are capable of producing the results that you want in a smaller and lighter package than your DSLR and competitive mirrorless cameras.<br>

Good luck in your decision.<br>

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/4-3rds-cameras/36866-fun-olympus-omd.html</p>

<p>Save money. Use what you already own and buy a good solid tripod. Below is a photo that I took through a glass store front with my LX5 (a small P&S that cost approximately $400 - definitely in a different league than the cameras you are considering) on a tripod. Bear in mind in order to post this photo on the internet, it is only 4% of its original resolution.</p>

<p>Details: Make: Panasonic; Model: DMC-LX5; ExposureTime: 1/6 s; FNumber: f/3.5; ISOSpeedRatings: 80; ExposureProgram: Aperture priority; ExposureBiasValue: 0; MeteringMode: CenterWeightedAverage; Flash: Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode; FocalLength: 19.2 mm;</p>

<p>I am sure that either the D700 or 5D with a super fast prime lens and their larger sensors would take a better IQ photo hand held. Again I shot this photo at f/3.5, ISO 80. If I used my G3 with my f/1.7 lens at ISO 400 or 800 I could have taken the photo handheld. For acceptable results I believe if you are shooting at night and your subjects are active, obtaining acceptable results with less hassle requires a fast lens and a camera with have high IQ-ISO capability so the camera can be hand held. Either of the two cameras that you mentioned and others mentioned by other contributors to this tread are very capable and will meet your goals. But I recommend that you include a tripod in your budget.</p>

<p><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/14158136-md.jpg" alt="" width="680" height="544" /></p>

<p>It seems as if you have researched everything thoroughly and you are merely looking for confirmation. If you believe that the cameras and lenses will fit you needs, then go for it. Cameras are seldom the limiting factor in obtaining good results, it is generally the photographer. Based on my cursory review of your excellent gallery, it appears as if you have capability. Therefore match the equipment with your subject, buy the best (and fastest) lenses available (consistent with your budget) and you should be able to get many great photos. Based on the photos that you have in your portfolio, I am sure that you would get great results with a P&S, even thought a P&S is limited in features and capability.</p>

<p>Good luck with your decision.</p>

<p>Jos,<br>

I have had 2 camera converted - both were good jobs. First, a Canon G9 by Lifepixed and then a Pansonic G1 by Precision Camera. I recommend that you pose your questions on the following website - that is exclusively for ir photography.</p>

<p>http://irphotocom.proboards.com/index.cgi</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Adrian,</p>

<p>Life Pixel converted by G9 back in 2007 and did a very good job. I had great success with the camera. I recently had a Panasonic G1 converted by another company. I gave my G9 to my nephew who is having a good time with ir.</p>

<p>Many of my ir photos on my website were taken with the G9 -- http://www.photo.net/photos/howardfuhrman I always tried to keep iso at base level when shooting with G9. When lighting conditions were dim, I would use a tripod. </p>

<p>Good luck with your ir converted G10.</p>

<p>Throw caution to the wind. When I started this reply, I was going to write something humorous, but I reread your comments and decided to be more thoughtful.</p>

<p>You present a classic dilemma since you want to keep both but are forced to choose due to economic necessity. You indicate that the Canon 35 is the most used combo. Therefore keep the Canon. Sell the Nikon body and Nikon Lenses. Replace your beloved Nikon 24-70 with a Canon and live with what you believe is slightly degraded IQ. Sell the Canon 70-200 and purchase the Canon lenses that you want.</p>

<p>My comments are only based on what I feel you indicated. It is not because I favor Canon or Nikon. If you indicated that you used Nikon more than Canon, my suggestion would have been to sell Canon and buy Nikon. Both are excellent camera systems that can produce outstanding images. You are presented with two good choices, with little downside, with either system you select.</p>

<p>I remember back in the late 1970's a company called Pressley came out with a black box hydrogen converted that was going to eliminate the US dependency on foreign oil. It is now 2011 and we are still dependent on foreign oil. As someone already pointed out, a number of years ago the Foveon Sensor would make all camera sensors obsolete. Now a company is publicizing a 'morning after" multifocus sensor, but there is no camera. Until I see and others see a working camera, as far as I am concerned it does not exist and may never exist. </p>

<p>I surmise that the company is is using the promotion to raise venture money to finance further research to see if their ideas can translate into a marketable product. Good luck to them.</p>

<p>Go to MY menu and it is on the same page as format. Good luck. Your camera looks great.</p>

<p>Howard</p>

<p>Paulie,<br>

I have a Panasonic G1 and use my Contax G2 CZ lenses via an adapter.<br>

Please refer to the following threads which may be of interest to you -- the first includes photos using M4/3 with the CZ lenses and the second thread deals with various adapters available to use the Contax G2 CZ lenses.</p>

<p>http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17934<br>

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11575</p>

<p>Howard</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I would like to add to what Steven indicated that pro grade lenses of Canon and Nikon are expensive. In addition they are generally better built, faster and heavier compared to consumer lenses. My suggestions is you should visit a camera store and hold the camera lens combinations in which you are interested. I always believe be careful what you wish for you may get it and then find that it does not fit your needs.<br>

There are no perfect cameras. If you want the best IQ and very quick, you probably want a FF sensor body with top lenses. They are expensive, bulky and heavy. When you get a lighter, less bulky, less expensive, you give up some speed and IQ. If you want something that fits in your pocket, you also give up lens interchangability, but you get portability.<br>

Good luck with your decision.</p>

<p>When I had to decide between the G10 and the LX3 many months ago, the decision was tough. I have and continue to use a G9 ir converted and know that Canon G's are excellent cameras. At that point the key factors was LX3 had the f2 lens 24mm lens. From all I read the IQ was comparable. Now the G11 has an articulating LCD and a VF and as Anthony so ably wrote: "I agree about the G11 viewfinder. It is almost useless... except in a pinch like very bright sunshine, and then it is priceless."<br>

<br /> I went to the beach the other day with the LX3 and in bright Southern California sunlight, the LCD was close to useless. The LX3's IQ is very good and from what I read the G11's IQ is comparable. Are the G11's articulating LCD, greater zoom range, and sometimes needed VF more important than the LX3 f2 24mm lens. I think today, if I had to make the choice I would get the G11 since it has the articulating LCD, although it would be tough to lose 24mm wa & f2.<br>

The choice between the G11, LX3 and S90 is totally different. Is the smaller size of the S90 more important than the better IQ that you would get from the G11 or LX3. If smaller size is more important than IQ, get the S90 since you may carry it with you more than the G11 and LX3.<br /> Good luck with your decision.</p>

<p>Maja,<br>

The features that you described are sparse other than the price range of $600-800USD. After that, you want a good camera, a good lens, a good zoom, a good battery, good macro and I guess you also want to be happy. <br>

Do you want a compact (Fuji S200EXR as suggested, a WA like like a Panasonic LX3, one with a decent range like a Canon G11?) Do you want a camera that has the capability of shooting raw with manual as well as automatic features? Do you want an entry level DSLR? Do you want a superzoom? What will be your prime subject matter? Is your subject matter moving or static? Does size of the camera matter? Do you want a camera that is pocketable? How important is high IQ? Provide some more specific information about what you want and you will receive some relevant responses. "Good" is not proper response; many or most of the cameras available these days are better than "Good". <br>

In any case, good luck with your decision.</p>

<p>Cam,<br>

You overpromised and now you are on your way to under delivering. Your dream could turn into a nightmare. I agree with a few others if she is the girl of your dreams and you believe you are the guy of her dreams, buy her a new camera. Get one that you would really like to use so when you are living happily ever after, you can share the camera.</p>

<p>I am not sure what type of subjects Leo plans on shooting. If the subjects are static, I have had success using a tripod and a Canon G9 (yes Canon has approved IQ at higher ISO's with the G11)shooting at the base ISO. If his subjects are moving and/or he gets an entry level DSLR, I agree with Zack and recommend a fast prime (2.0 or faster) and a tripod and higher ISO's can sometimes be avoided. <br>

Good luck in your decision.</p>